The human race doesn't have the need to clone children when it has so many needy orphans. .
Ethically, cloning is wrong. As Soren Holm presented what he calls "a life in the shadow" an argument against the cloning of humans. He does not join those who regard human cloning as intrinsically wrong, but he looks to the likely results and offers his assessment of such a practice. Holm contends that autonomy is an important value, but cloning deprives a person of meaningful or full autonomy. As long as the public accepts "genetic essentialism" (the belief that a person's characteristics are largely determined by one's genes), a practice of cloning humans will deprive a cloned subject of his or her own life. That is, it will deprive the cloned individual of an autonomous life "outside the shadow" of the older individual from whom the subject was cloned. The popular acceptance of genetic essentialism is likely to lead people to have certain expectations of the cloned subjects. Comparisons with the older individual from whom the subject was cloned are likely to be drawn. The comparisons will generally be made to approve or disapprove of the direction the clone's life is taking, depending on the contributions or harm done by the individual from whom the subject was cloned. Such comparisons are likely to deprive clones of a life of their own. Holm places autonomy at the center of his moral analysis of human cloning. This measure of right action is defended by autonomy contradictions. To be created in a lab takes away from the love and significance that goes into making each and every one of us. The parents of a naturally born child love them no matter what, partly because the parents take the risk of conception which could lead to death to the woman or death to their unborn child. Cloned people also might not be accepted by society they possibly could be regarded as objects instead of people. Even their parents possibly wont accept them, the ones who try to breed their child into the best possible person.
